I read that wiki article, and it did not support your position.
All the examples it gave were of dichotomies that were
*not* presented as hypothetical. I understand the term
"false dichotomy" to refer specifically to a rhetorical
attempt to narrow the possible choices for discussion
down to fewer than there are, especially in cases
where the two presented are not even mutually
exclusive. Gene's comment did nothing of the sort;
it merely asked which of two things is more important.
It implicitly noted that it wasn't an actual choice.

It is a small point, though.

> I interpreted the
> response as simply saying it's an irrelevant question because the
> antecedent is generally false. If you see relevance in the question,
> what is it exactly?

The relevance is in the question of why does one come
to this newsgroup? If it is for social interaction, then one
has mistaken the purpose of the group. If it is for factual
information, then putting a pretty face on such is of minor
importance.